4 ms·
There are no current languages that can displace C, none, zero. If you want a language that _will_ displace C it needs to be designed and features mapped, inter
by nwmcsween 8y ago
There are no current languages that can displace C, none, zero. If you want a language that _will_ displace C it needs to be designed and features mapped, interactions, pros, cons, etc so others can understand it and __why__ choices were made.
- pjmlp 8y agoExcept that C++ is already doing that, even if slower than desired. AUTOSAR now requires C++14 compliance on software certification. Android, ChromeOS, Windows, Apple OSes native components are mostly written in C++. Finally, all major C compilers are written in C++ nowadays. The only places where C++ is failing to replace C, is among developers unwilling to move beyond C89 on embedded space, or UNIX clones.
- nwmcsween 8y agoC++ is evolved not designed from the start. A properly (IMO) designed language would have a pro, con wiki/ graph map and features would have _all_ interactions mapped. C isn't this either but it doesn't try to paint over bad feature interactions by adding more.
- pjmlp 8y agoYes, because C99 was such a design success with mistakes being made optional in C11.
- nwmcsween 8y agoI'm not advocating for C, I'm just describing a language that could displace C while having some good features. C takes features to the extreme by having few and being somewhat simple, a language designed as I stated could have features and still remain simple.
- blub 8y agoI've already pointed another person to the book "The design and evolution of C++" which I believe puts the not designed argument to rest. But it is impossible to create a beautiful, "properly designed" programming language that's also backwards compatible with C. I mean look at Objective-C :)